An Amendment authorizes free mailing privileges for family members of servicemen and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

An Amendment sought to prohibit funds authorized in the bill from being obligated or expended to plan a contingency operation in Iran.

An Amendment sought to add language to clarify that no previous authorization constitutes an authorization to use force against Iran; and make certain that no funds would be used to take military action against Iran in the absence of specific congressional authority or a direct attack.

An Amendment, as modified, requires the Department of Defense to transport the remains of service members by air to the military or civilian airport nearest to the place selected by the family.

An amendment to clarify that nothing in this legislation would prevent the United States' missile defense capabilities from being placed on operational alert to respond to an immediate, threat posed by ballistic missiles.

Amendment sought to add language to clarify that the prohibition on establishing permanent military bases in Iraq will not prevent the United States and Iraq from entering into military basing rights agreements for the establishment of temporary bases in Iraq.

Amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a report that contains a plan for the transfer of each individual presently detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under the control of the Joint Task Force Guantanamo, who is or has ever been classified as an "enemy combatant".

Amendment sought to require the video recording of interrogations and other pertinent interactions between U.S. military personnel, or contractors, and detainees arrested and held.

To restore habeas corpus for those detained by the United States.

To limit the length of deployment of members of the Armed Forced for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

To strike section 1023, relating to the granting of civil rights to terror suspects.

To provide for a reduction and transition of United States forces in Iraq.

To express the sense of the Senate that it is in the national security interest of the United States that Iraq not become a failed state and a safe haven for terrorists.

To require a report on the planning and implementation of the policy of the United States toward Darfur.

AND numerous place holders for Senators to come back and add amendments to the bill.

King George is asking for more billions (230 at last estimate) to continue the war in Iraq. And, although the liberals are being admonished by their constituents to deny the money, insiders know the painful truth...if we do, the President will not bring our troops home, he will continue what he did at first, namely fight the war on the cheap. Not enough Kevlar vests, practically open air Humvee offering no protection...well, against anything, etc.

So, what do we do? Vote against it and be called traitors or enemies of the troops, or pass it, and suffer increasingly plummeting poll numbers from our voting base? Clearly, we have to give the $$$. We cannot turn our backs on the unfortunates over in the Middle east fighting this war. To do otherwise would further jeopardize the troops (whether "phony" or not, as Rush "Vicodin" Gasbag has clearly identified them).

So, we vote for the bill, BUT NOT UNTIL WE ATTACH WHAT WE WANT. Hate crimes legislation, increases in the minimum wage, recension to the rich mans tax cut, etc. We get what we want, or you can shove your war spending act up your filibuster. Go ahead and veto it, smart guy. Spin it anyway you would like.

Yes, I have heard the criticism of the Hate Crimes Bill...you cannot change the penalties for what people think, it is the thought police, Orwellian nightmare, etc. I have even heard the actual hate crimes are all trumped up to make it look like there is a problem that just plain old does not exist (I love that one). But can you look at these instances and tell me an extra penalty shouldn't be levied against the people who committed these crimes (there are many, many more, folks)?

On October 6, 1998, 21-year-old college student Matthew Shepard was tied to a fence in Laramie, Wyoming, pistol-whipped, then left for dead in the freezing night. He died six days later.

Born Teena Brandon and raised as a girl, he was living as a man known as Brandon Teena in Falls City, Nebraska, when he was murdered at age 21. In December of 1993, two men who discovered his gender raped him. His attackers later shot and killed him after learning Brandon had reported the rape and was to help police in the investigation.

On September 22, 2000, a man looking to "waste some faggots" entered a gay bar in Roanoke, Virginia and opened fire, killing Danny Overstreet, and injuring 6 others.

On the fourth of July, 2000, JR Warren, 26, who was black and gay, was beaten to death by three men in West Virginia, then run over by a car to make it look like a hit and run

Pfc. Barry Winchell, 21, was beaten to death by fellow service members while sleeping in his cot on July 5, 1999 at Fort Campbell, Ky. His Army colleagues thought (correctly) that he was gay, so they killed him.

Billy Jack Gaither, 39, of Sylacauga, Alabama was bludgeoned to death by two men on Feb. 19, 1999, then set on fire with automobile tires because he was gay.

On May 8, 1995, Bill Clayton, 17, committed suicide after having been brutally assaulted for being bisexual.

On August 7, 1995, Tyra Hunter died after DC fire department emergency medical technicians called her epithets, backed away, and refused to render treatment on discovering that she was a transgendered woman.

Yes, things have gotten better. Social acceptance is evolving. But, as long as there is one instance of a bigoted, depraved hate crime killer out there, then this legislation if necessary. Will it be used often? Probably not. Will it deter crimes of this nature? Probably not, these people do not care about anything but their own hate. But we need to lock these people up for life when proven in a court of law. When the motive is hate, then extra penalties must be judiciously applied. And all of our citizens must be protected. I leave you with some quotes from a woman who knows the environment, and realities of being a minority in this culture and suffering for it.....

Make Room At The Table for Lesbian and Gay PeopleCoretta Scott King, speaking four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, said Tuesday the civil rights leader's memory demanded a strong stand for gay and lesbian rights. "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," she said. "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'" "I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," she said.

Homophobia is Like Racism and Anti-SemitismCoretta Scott King, the wife of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. "Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and person hood," King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group."

"Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination." - Coretta Scott King

Saturday, September 29, 2007

OBAMA-ble has done it again folks. Runnin' his mouth off and stepping in it. Obama, an admitted former cocaine user himself in his published books is recommending a change in the criminal sentences in regards to crack and powdered cocaine.

"If you're convicted of a crime involving drugs, of course you should be punished," Obama said at Howard University's opening convocation. "But let's not make the punishment for crack cocaine that much more severe than the punishment for powder cocaine when the real difference is where the people are using them or who is using them."

Well, let see...does he want to increase the penalty for powdered cocaine, the white man's choice of the drug, or does he want to decrease the penalties on crack cocaine, the economical choice of his own people? Hint: He was speaking at Howard University.

Folks, I know the judicial inequities in the law, and how it is racially slanted towards the whites. I also know we continue to live in an unfortunately biased and bigoted world.

But, why even bring this up except to pander to get minority votes? For a man still wet behind the senatorial ears, he is learning fast, isn't he? Of course, he is being programmed by the best money can buy, and he has plenty of that. On call to Oprah, and he is bathing in money. One estimate is he has received donations from 75,000 donors in the past 3 months, out shadowing all candidates on either side.

Trouble is, if this man gets elected, he will be the most inexperienced president ever, in arguably the most difficult time to run this country ever. I hate to say it, but this man has all the potential to be a black Jimmy Carter style President. Woefully inexperienced and lacking the political savvy to run a country, let alone deal with a critical time in foreign relations, he could spell disaster.

Eight years of stupidity and four years of inexperience could definitely set us on an irreversible course. Elected out of spite amid glaring differences with the previous administration, they will settle for the worst option we have, a romantic, racially progressive choice, yes. But if you are looking for romance, vote for Bush again. He's been screwing you for seven years now.

Wise up America....this is no time for rookies.

This job is not posted as "President wanted...no experience necessary."

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee leveled some of the harshest criticisms of the Bush administration’s foreign policy yet from the GOP presidential field, saying it has mismanaged relations with Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Huckabee said the U.S. is ignoring options besides armed conflict with Iran, has trusted the Saudis too much and has allowed Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to go back on his commitment to allow American forces to root out terrorism within his borders.

“Just like Musharraf, since 9/11, the Bush administration has played both ends and the middle, assuring the American people that it’s doing everything it can to protect them, while tiptoeing around our supposed ally,” Huckabee said. “It’s been afraid of upsetting the apple cart, even though the cart contains poisoned apples destined for export to the United States.”

Huckabee said the United States (BUSH) has trusted the Saudis and made them rich, only to see thefunds used as “seed money for terrorism,” and that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan will ultimately back whoever can win.

He said the U.S. is headed down one track with Iran and ignoring options besides war — a result he said would greatly please Osama bin Laden.

Just another stupid attempt from the right to make the left look like traitors, like enablers of dictators, like the best friends of all terrorists. They said Iran's number 2 man (pictured above), could / should run for the Democratic ticket. Now they are saying we are in bed together.

Friday, September 28, 2007

"David Petraeus is a political general. Yet in presenting his recent assessment of the Iraq War and in describing the “way forward,” Petraeus demonstrated that he is a political general of the worstkind—one who indulges in the politics of accommodation that is Washington’s bread and butter.......""Critics have questioned the data that Petraeus offered to substantiate his case. They charge him with relying on dubiousstatistics, with ignoring facts that he finds inconvenient, and with discovering trends where none exist. They question whether to credit the much-touted progress in Anbar province to American shrewdness or to the vagaries of Iraqi sectarian and tribal politics. They cite the pathetic performance of the corrupt and dysfunctional Iraqi government. They note the disparity between the Petraeusassessment and those offered by the intelligence community, by the GovernmentAccountability Office, and by congressionally appointed blue-ribbon commissions. They point out that other highly qualified and well-informed senior military officers—notably, Gen. George Casey, the army chief of staff, and Adm. William Fallon, commander of United States Central Command—have publicly expressed views notably at odds with those of General Petraeus.

The critics make a good case."

Now do not get me wrong, or good Lord forbid, take these excerpts as the general thesis behind the article. The article (available on line) , or on your newstand, is devoted to the thesis that if the general truly believes he has put the U.S. on the right course (or "roadmap", as they so eliquently have put it), then it makes absolutely no sense to draw back military forces, yet any reasonable person would conclude that the General should have declared the progress, and taken advantage of the situation, the willingness of the administration to comply, and the impending doomed political climate for the copnservatives, and request, nay, demand more troops to finish what he has so successfully started. Although on the subject of Iraq I have flip-flopped more than the best of the presidential hopefuls (seeing the futilityand the wrongful way we were duped into going into this mess vs. our ultinmate responsibility now to the Iraqi people), I will return the favor to this thoughful, albeit politically and diametrically opposing publication to me...

The author makes a good case.

So do I...Congress must vote to declare this article a disgrace, and as unamerican much in the same way it responded to the ad by Move On.org (another organization I do not wholeheartedly agree with either), or be shown as the weak kneed hypocrites they will have proven themselves to be. Fair is fair.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Our mission is to provide a means for learning, self-expression and exploration to the nearly two billion children of the developing world with little or no access to education. While children are by nature eager for knowledge, many countries have insufficient resources to devote to education—sometimes less than $20 a year per child. Imagine the potential that could be unlocked by giving every child in the world the tools they need to learn, no matter who they are, no matter where they live, no matter how little they may have.

HERE'S HOW IT WORKS....FOR $400.00 YOU GET ONE, AND A NEEDY CHILD GETS ONE.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

On newstands now.....The Advocate, the only magazine with the balls enough to get in Senator Clinton's pie hole and ask her what some people have privately questioned for some time now...

"Senator, are you a lesbian?" And here is her reply...

“People say a lot of things about me, so I really don’t pay any attention to it,” Hillary tells him blithely. “It’s not true, but it is something that I have no control over. People will say what they want to say.”

Although a stong critic of gay marriage, her responses to questions such as these lead gay voters to believe deep down inside she may think otherwise.

Friday, September 21, 2007

By now, you probably have seen, or at least heard of this advertisement by the liberal group Move On.org. The President saw it, and called it yellow and cowardly, and used the opportunity to call the left his usual bowl full of shit...the latest version of "you are either with ME or against me", or "you are the terrorists best friend", "you are against the troops" or "Al Quida votes Democratic."

He even went so far as to have the conservative sheep of congress draft a meaningless, time consuming piece of fluff in order to condemn Move On.org. Give them credit, they even got 22 liberals to vote for it.

The question bares repeating...did the General betray us? I say NO. Just because he gave up his military command just long enough to be the President's PR man in congress? NO. He didn't betray us by mis-communicating the amount of casualties in Iraq, he didn't betray us by trying to sell the American people on the mistaken notion that the surge is working all over Iraq; he betrayed his soldiers. He betrayed himself. Because by allowing himself to be the Presidents lap dog, he crossed the line between being military and being political; something his predecessors never would.

Can you imagine Patton, Eisenhower, et al being used as a propaganda tool? Hell no. They would rather quit the military than appear weak. The truth? The Pentagon has come up with fuzzy statistics to attempt to justify troop surge, and paint a rosy picture in Iraq. The truth is, the daily number of civilian deaths is almost twice the average pace from last year. The truth is, the good and brave General is known for misstating the truth...such as when he said just before the 2004 election, "The Iraqi leaders are stepping forward," "Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt" or when he said in 2005, "Enormous progress is being made with the Iraqi security forces." The only thing I have heard the good General say which even remotely resembles the truth is when he stated recently

"The U.S. will be in Iraq in some way for the next 9 or 10 years."

LIKE IT..... OR NOT, BELIEVE IT ....OR NOT, AGREE WITH IT .....OR NOT,

Monday, September 17, 2007

On last nights 60 Minutes episode, there was an interview by Leslie Stahl of the ex-Federal Reserve Board head / Economics guru and stout supporter of the GOP, Alan Greenspan; a person who holds the unique position of having the inside knowledge to adequately and fairly efvaluating the past Presidents he had worked extremely closely with, and here is the scorecard....

Hillary Clinton: "very smart" "unquestionably capable of assuming the role of President"

The official conservative response to the Greenspan interview should be forthcoming, although they will struggle, as their usual tactic of criticizing the interviewee and throwing them under the bus will be extremely difficult as Greenspan was the GOP darling, thus his continued employment under 5 Republican Presidents.

Guess they will just have to read it, and let the truth sink in.

I suppose they will be calling their travel agents for a lengthy (and typical) trip to "DeNile."

Friday, September 14, 2007

What do you do when you realize that combat unit terms are about to espire in April, you have no combat units to replace them, and deploying additional reservists would threaten national security?

You go in front of the American people, insult their intelligence and try to snowball them into thinking that they will be going home in July...first, because it is my (Bush's) idea, and

THE REDUCTION IS BASED SOLELY on the "recent success acheived in Iraq."

Then you have Gates leak to the media that not only will we be at pre-surge levels by July next year, but we could go from 169,000 troops down to 69,000 by the end of next year.

As if this wasn't enough, you then include in your speech exaggerations on how many countries are in Iraq helping us, and distort many other facts and current conditions there in order to paint a rosier picture, despite two of your Generals appearing in front of congress denying almost everything you claim.

A former Reagan official has issued a public warning that the Bush administration is preparing to orchestrate a staged terrorist attack in the United States, transform the country into a dictatorship and launch a war with Iran within a year.

Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, blasted Thursday a new Executive Order, released July 17, allowing the White House to seize the assets of anyone who interferes with its Iraq policies and giving the government expanded police powers to exercise control in the country. Roberts, who spoke on the Thom Hartmann radio program, said: "When Bush exercises this authority [under the new Executive Order], there's no check to it. So it really is a form of total, absolute, one-man rule.""The American people don't really understand the danger that they face," Roberts said, adding that the so-called neoconservatives intended to use a renewal of the fight against terrorism to rally the American people around the fading Republican Party. Old-line Republicans like Roberts have become increasingly disenchanted with the neoconservative politics of the Bush administration, which they see as a betrayal of fundamental conservative values.

The administration figures themselves and prominent Republican propagandists ... are preparing us for another 9/11 event or series of events," he said. "You have to count on the fact that if al Qaeda is not going to do it, it is going to be orchestrated." Roberts suggested that in the absence of a massive popular outcry, only the federal bureaucracy and perhaps the military could put constraints on Bush's current drive for a fully-fledged dictatorship. "They may have had enough. They may not go along with it," he said. The radio interview was a follow-up to Robert's latest column, in which he warned that "unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the U.S. could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran." Roberts, who has been dubbed the "Father of Reaganomics" and has recently gained popularity for his strong opposition to the Bush administration and the Iraq War.

Friday, September 7, 2007

In my humble opinion, these are the best snacking chips on the market today. The mango chips are crispy and chocked full of flavor. They say they are healthy but you really wouldn't know it to taste them.

You would be a bona fide two-faced hypocritical right wing moron not to try these today. See the website and get a dollar off coupon. From us left wing commie pinkos to a store near you. Just a tip to all of you right wingers...they are loaded with fiber to cure the obvious blockages you have developed which prevent you from ridding your systems of the built up crap that plagues you. Papa...buy two bags, please!!!

BEFORE YOU ENTER THIS........ REMEMBER THIS.Family values?Corruption, prostitution and lude and lascivious conduct.Do you really want to vote for the party of Craig, Stevens and Vidder?If you do, don't forget to flush.

Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) continues to maintain his position on the Appropriations Committee, and has avoided a Senate investigation, despite being the subject of a major criminal investigation, including an FBI raid on his Alaska home. Second, Senator David Vitter (R-LA), who has not been charged, has admitted to the crime of soliciting for prostitution. Senator Vitter remains not only unscathed by his actions, but was greetedwith a standing ovation at a Republican conference luncheon shortly after his scandal hit the airwaves.Both Senators Stevens and Vitter have committed crimes that reflect poorly upon the Senate and should be subject to the same scrutiny as Sen. Craig.

A MESSAGE FROM KIMBA

Welcome to my world, "The World According to Kimba." You may not agree with everything I write or think, and may not subscribe to my particular viewpoints on the issues of the day, but it is all me; as it should be.I intend to use this blog to voice my opinions and perceptions on the world, in the hopes that someone, somewhere listens, and hopefully leaves a comment to spur others on to weighing in.Vox populai, the voice of the people. That is what this blog is about, that is what the blogosphere should be about.If you would like to contact me directly, I can be found at kimbarudd@att.net. Thanks for reading, Kimba.